Are Jane Austen and Charles Dickens science fiction?

Now, my title question might strike you as bizarre, if you know the least thing about literature. However, it is a question that my life experience posed for me, recently.

A couple of weeks ago, I was in the Times Bookshop in Sri Hartamas, in Kuala Lumpur. I had gone in search of a book for Ainan. (He wanted a copy of Restaurant at the End of the Universe by Douglas Adams, since he had enjoyed Life, the Universe and Everything. Of course, I already have copy many thousands of miles away in England, but that is not much use to me here!) So, there I was browsing the shelves for Douglas Adams’ work. Despite the most careful search, it was clear that they didn’t have a single book by the amusing Mr. Adams. However, they did have something most strange. In a very prominent position, on the top shelf of the Science Fiction and Fantasy section, was a pile of books by Jane Austen. You know the ones: such “science fiction” classics as Emma and Pride and Prejudice. Next to this, were some books by Charles Dickens, such as A tale of two cities. At this sight, I pause a moment, in reverence at the stupendous obtuseness, of the person who had categorized these books so.

Did I miss something? Has period literature of the 18th and 19th century been reclassified as “Science Fiction/ Fantasy”, whilst I was looking elsewhere? Is the modern attitude to the past so distorted, that works of relative realism about past times, can now be seen as so outlandish that they must be filed in “Science Fiction/Fantasy”?

This incident does make me wonder, however, whether the bookshop assistant who did this, is actually able to read the books he or she so files. Are they completely unable to recognize what type of book, a book is, from a brief glance? Do they not know the reputations of some of the most famous authors in history? I would have thought that anyone who had studied English literature for even the most basic qualification, would be familiar with the type of oeuvre of famed authors, even if not with the works themselves. Perhaps this incident is an indicator that a little more effort, in the education system, could be put into the humanities. Like most parts of Asia, the sciences and maths are emphasized, often to the detriment of all else. This is harmful. A scientist who does not read, is probably one who cannot write – and that is one who cannot communicate his or her work. I would suggest, therefore, that an appreciation of literature be inculcated, in Malaysia’s youngsters, in addition to their grasp of maths and science. Otherwise, oddly categorized books, in bookstores will be the least of Malaysia’s problems with its workforce, in the long term.

It should be noted that, although I saw this happen in Malaysia, that it is very easy to believe it could happen in Singapore, too and other South East Asian countries. Here, in Asia, science and maths are all - and the rest can often be forgotten, to an unfortunate degree.

(If you would like to support my continued writing of this blog and my ongoing campaign to raise awareness about giftedness and all issues pertaining to it, please donate, by clicking on the gold button to the left of the page.

To read about my fundraising campaign, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-in-support-of-my.html

and here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-first-donation.html

If you would like to read any of our scientific research papers, there are links to some of them, here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/02/research-papers-by-valentine-cawley-and.html

If you would like to see an online summary of my academic achievements to date, please go here: http://www.getcited.org/mbrz/11136175

To learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 7 and Tiarnan, 5, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

There is a review of my blog, on the respected The Kindle Report here:http://thekindlereport.blogspot.com/2010/09/boy-who-knew-too-much-child-prodigy.html

Please have a read, if you would like a critic's view of this blog. Thanks. You can get my blog on your Kindle, for easy reading, wherever you are, by going to: http://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Knew-Too-Much/dp/B0042P5LEE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1284603792&sr=8-1

Please let all your fellow Kindlers know about my blog availability - and if you know my blog well enough, please be so kind as to write a thoughtful review of what you like about it. Thanks.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at:http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/

Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/

Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is athttp://www.genghiscan.com/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.)

Elizabeth Alexander, Inaugural poet.

For me, the most unforgettable part of President Obama's inauguration shall ever be, The Inauguration Poem read by Elizabeth Alexander. It was unforgettable in the way atom bombs are unforgettable: truly terrible.

Now, I love words. I appreciate those who craft them into art and make of them something beautiful - but, and this is a big but, I don't like to see them abused. Elizabeth Alexander's poem was, in itself, nothing special. It had nothing particularly interesting to say. It had no memorable lines (so I have forgotten it all already, being, as it was, unworthy of remark). However, that was not the crime for which she will long be remembered: her crime against art, was that she cannot read. She may be a Professor of African American Studies and English Literature at Yale University, she may be an "award-winning poet" (though I wonder which awards and why she won them) - but she is not an able performer. Her stilted, indeed, stunted, rendering of the English language marred the Inauguration in a way that no-one else, despite some evident effort in some quarters, quite managed to.

Elizabeth Alexander had less ability to read English than, I think, any of the foreign students of English I have ever taught in my life. It was as if her mental processing abilities struggled to interpret each word, individually, finally worked out what they were, said them, then proceeded to struggle with the next word, and so on, interminably, until the welcome end. I have glanced over some interviews she gave in the lead up to the inauguration and she came across as very sure of her own abilities and filled with arcane understanding of the poet's art. It seems, however, that her understanding does not extend beyond that of a critic - for she is not, by this evidence, a natural poet, nor a natural performer/speaker of English. She also remarked that she always sought to find the rhythm of a piece. Perhaps, to be kind, that was what she was trying to do: find rhythm in her words. Well, personally, I have always found it easy to find rhythm in speech - simply opening one's mouth and speaking usually does the trick. She, however, struggled to find this rhythm of which she sought. She laboured over it. She toiled with each word, wrestling with it, begging it to be rhythmic - and failed.

I have been to a couple of poetry readings in my life - not many, I admit, but in their varied performances I never noted anyone who lacked the basic ability to read aloud. In fact, I found myself embarrassed to watch her excruciating peformance: it made me squirm to witness it, so bad was it.

Now, there is a serious point as to why I have brought this awful - perhaps the most awful - poetry performance to the attention of my readers. You see, Elizabeth Alexander's terrible lack of basic poetic talent, leads me to ask a question: is President Obama going to choose people because they are the best at what they do - or for other reasons, closer to home? Is President Obama going to abide by meritocratic principles - or is he going to offer positions to people whose native merit doesn't deserve them?

I cannot believe that Elizabeth Alexander is the best poet in America. I cannot believe that she is the best poetic performer in America (since all of the students I have ever taught read better than her - and they don't even speak English). Yet, Elizabeth Alexander was chosen for this very special moment. Her poem was heard by more people on Earth than perhaps any other poem has ever been heard. Yet, it was not a good poem, not remotely so. Furthermore, it was read as if she had no feeling for language at all.

If Elizabeth Alexander really had to be the Inauguration poet, someone else really should have read the poem. There are people who could read a shopping list and make it sound interesting. Someone with that kind of gift should have been chosen. A natural actor should have read the poem - not Elizabeth Alexander, Yale Professor and "award winning" poet.

President Obama needs to change the way he selects people. He cannot select people based on any other criteria than quality. They should be the best at what they do. Only in this manner will he best serve the American people.

If there is a single poet in America better than Elizabeth Alexander, then she should not have been chosen - whether they be black, white, asian, Muslim or Jew - if there is a better poet, they should have been selected. If there is a single performer, whether they be black, white, asian, Muslim or Jew better than Elizabeth Alexander, they should have been selected to read it. (It seems to me, offhand, that any of the hundreds of thousands of members of Actor's Equity would have done a better job: picking any one of them at random would have produced a better result than this).

Perhaps President Obama was fooled by her credentials. Elizabeth Alexander is, after all, a Yale Professor - and he might, therefore, have expected much of her. However, as I noted from my own experience of Cambridge University, appointment at a prominent University is no guarantee of quality. Some people are very good at securing advancement for themselves despite limited ability in the area in which they are advanced. It is common for University academics to have good critical skills, but indifferent creative ones. From the evidence of yesterday's astonishing performance, Elizabeth Alexander may well be such an academic.

I hope never to see another appointment made by President Obama, for any other reason than merit. He lowers the world's view of him, by doing so. President Obama must surround himself by the best, if his administration is to be of the best. I cannot believe that Elizabeth Alexander is the best America had to offer. Quite simply, she should never have been there - and I should never have heard of her.

Please do better next time, President Obama: the United States deserves it.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and seven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, five years exactly, and Tiarnan, twenty-eight months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind.

We are the founders of Genghis Can, a copywriting, editing and proofreading agency, that handles all kinds of work, including technical and scientific material. If you need such services, or know someone who does, please go to: http://www.genghiscan.com/ Thanks.

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication prohibited. Use Only with Permission. Thank you.)